ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
A comparative study on the bilateral areolar endoscopic approach versus the conventional open thyroidectomy.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes of bilateral areolar endoscopic approach (BAA) vs. conventional open approach (COA) thyroidectomy for papillary thyroid carcinoma (TC) and to evaluate the added value of propensity score matching (PSM) and decision curve analysis (DCA). Methods: Eighty-eight female patients were retrospectively divided into BAA ( Results: Patients in the BAA group were significantly younger (29.0 ± 5.7 vs. 43.5 ± 8.6 years, Conclusion: BAA thyroidectomy offers superior cosmetic satisfaction, less pain, and reduced blood loss compared with COA, with benefits persisting after rigorous confounding adjustment. The preoperative model demonstrated clinical utility in personalizing patient selection for BAA. BAA is a safe and highly satisfactory option for selected patients with papillary TC. However, patient selection based on cosmetic preference introduces unmeasured confounding by preoperative cosmetic expectations, which may influence subjective outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.